Woody Allen

[kid-glove]

Also in many respects I find 'Match Point' to be better than C&M. I remember reading an excellent post by Rosenbaum on this. Will post it here.

[groucho070]

AvarukAga vAthAda mAtten, I disagree to one or two points. For example, on Allen being annoying all. I am always happy to see him on screen. Anyway, good that you guys read that piece. Thilak, waiting for the post.

[kid-glove]

http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.com/?p=5889

[P_R]

http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.com/?p=5889
In almost all respects, Match Point is an improvement over Crimes and Misdemeanors. It’s better crafted and more absorbing, and it doesn’t have the distractions of Allen’s wisecracks and extended banal philosophizing.
Hmm.. I guess he didn't like the Woody story at all. It is extremely well done. It is what prompted me to start this thread actually! Very first post.

What is an affair? The man who is never going to leave his wife but has an affair promising his mistress, so. Is it outright duplicity? Is it self-delusion (Sidney Pollack - hating being judged, wanting to relax standards and then realizing he is judgmental and possibly that's what he wants!). Does Jonah want to leave his wife - seems unlikely. He seems to have had an affair because he could afford to. i.e. that he could live a life he has not had a chance to.

The visceral reason is the man with sexual appetite wedded to a menopausal (oru yoogam dhaan) wife. But look at his choice. With Dolores, he has someone who would hold him in awe for being what he is. It's not like he lowers his standards. He doesn't quite see the dignified life becoming of his social station is stifling. But his day-job life with its politeness, reservedness, gentleness is what he has to keep up with, just to be where he is. Whereas with Dolores, it is something out of place, grand. Something she would reach and aspire for. The aphrodisiac-ness of this cannot be understated.

And Woody makes you understand Dolores' desperation. The unchaste, kept woman threatening exposure has rarely (adhaavadhu, naan paartha varaikkin) been shown so damn well.
It is not just the pure hurt at being spurned and used that is working her. She will never ever get a better man that Jonah. And Jonah knows that - indeed that was part of the high!
That is why he knows she will stop at nothing, that is why he knows he HAS to kill her.

It seems clear as ever to us that she is not his intellectual, social match. 'you're kidding me, if you thought this was for real' is what you want to say to Dolores. But a girl - that too not a very bright one - past her prime, with few takers couldn't've believed her stroke of luck when she got Jonah. And one can understand how she may have fallen for him. She is so not a simple gold-digger (for you to feel she 'deserved to die').

I didn't feel Nola in MP was anywhere near as well fleshed out.

And the Woody-Mia Farrow story is also exactly about the intellectual match business. It is not a pure/non-judgmental love (is there anything like that?).Woody is in no social position to cheat on his wife! Yet that is what he tries to do. He also thinks his wife is no match for him. He thinks nearly as poorly of her as thinks of Alda- who is shown to be his 'superior' not just in the 'ways of the world' but also in terms of 'poetry reading'!! So - if only he were not that endearing and relatable a character - we can judge him pretty harshly for putting the moves on Mia Farrow. And we see right before our eyes she is going to smash his hopes and headed exactly in the feared direction. In the end Woody's character does climb his high and lonely moral ground.

And for the charges of "highbrow posturing" (I don't think I fully understand what you are agreeing with k-g), Allen has always made fun of it from inside, no? In C&M for instance, Woody's character is shown to be one with a disproportionately bloated ego.

There are several places where he does this. VCB for example - the famous v/o in the picnic scene - he talks about the free spirit of Europe :lol: That's a bloody mockery of the feel of the movie! The girls are enjoying a European vacation, we think we are enjoying a European movie. But by mere tongue-in-cheek mention he all he makes us think that perhaps the girls just think they are drinking in Europe, and by extension, so are we! End of the vacation, we have to pack our bags and come home and be our confused, restricted selves.

Yes, his people seem to believe 'a good life is art-appreciation based'. And they are - the funny ones atleast - anxious about having opinions about them. But by simply presenting these clamorous, clumsy individuals Woody seems to be repeatedly saying life is elsewhere (the wordless Opera scene in Manhattan - what excellence)

In Interiors, he has the husband talk about being afraid of his anger after he wrote a caustic review of his friend's book. Is he is he afraid his opinions are more important to him than his relationships or is he afraid, he is overbalancing to ensure that is not the case? Who is to say? Isn't this quite close to the problem of the intellectual who can't date a girl who believes in sun-signs?



Whatever happened, Allen has finally emerged as something of a storyteller
That's a little uncharitable. ennamO ippo dhaan graduate aana maadhiri.

[kid-glove]

Hmm.. I guess he didn't like the Woody story at all. It is extremely well done. It is what prompted me to start this thread actually! Very first post.
I was captivated by Woody's parts at first. But then, you start feeling more for his story than Angelica Huston. There's something fundamentally wrong if you get distracted like this. Particularly so that the film is about crime.


What is an affair? The man who is never going to leave his wife but has an affair promising his mistress, so. Is it outright duplicity? Is it self-delusion (Sidney Pollack - hating being judged, wanting to relax standards and then realizing he is judgmental and possibly that's what he wants!). Does Jonah want to leave his wife - seems unlikely. He seems to have had an affair because he could afford to. i.e. that he could live a life he has not had a chance to.

The visceral reason is the man with sexual appetite wedded to a menopausal (oru yoogam dhaan) wife. But look at his choice. With Dolores, he has someone who would hold him in awe for being what he is. It's not like he lowers his standards. He doesn't quite see the dignified life becoming of his social station is stifling. But his day-job life with its politeness, reservedness, gentleness is what he has to keep up with, just to be where he is. Whereas with Dolores, it is something out of place, grand. Something she would reach and aspire for. The aphrodisiac-ness of this cannot be understated.

One other problem I had is that Landau's relationship & domestic situation was neither suggested or portrayed with as much conviction as Pollack's in H&W, or Meyer in MP. Landau's seems harmonious & manageable.

The suggestion seems to be that he had a random fling & he held on it. But he grew out of it.

He could have exposed it & stood a good chance of holding on to the family.

It turns into a blackmail & uncontrollable situation because his financial wrongdoings stood a chance of being exposed.


And Woody makes you understand Dolores' desperation. The unchaste, kept woman threatening exposure has rarely (adhaavadhu, naan paartha varaikkin) been shown so damn well.
It is not just the pure hurt at being spurned and used that is working her. She will never ever get a better man that Jonah. And Jonah knows that - indeed that was part of the high!
That is why he knows she will stop at nothing, that is why he knows he HAS to kill her.

It seems clear as ever to us that she is not his intellectual, social match. 'you're kidding me, if you thought this was for real' is what you want to say to Dolores. But a girl - that too not a very bright one - past her prime, with few takers couldn't've believed her stroke of luck when she got Jonah. And one can understand how she may have fallen for him. She is so not a simple gold-digger (for you to feel she 'deserved to die').

Hmmm. I looked at it in a different way. There's always a part in him that inherently desires to be amoral. Maybe it's in the DNA. The brother is a goon. Maybe it's the upbringing. There's a childhood sequence of an aunt influencing part of his subconscious. Despite the conditioning, there's still that part wired in to him.

Is the person conditioned to follow a 'moral code' capable of such acts, seems to be the suggestion.


I didn't feel Nola in MP was anywhere near as well fleshed out.
No, it does in lot more subtle ways.

There's a lot more sexual tension suggested here. Scarlett Johansson vs Emily Mortimer - Is this even a contest?

And the real devils of inherent immorality when they have sex by the fields.

A less intellectual person wanting to stick on to his wealthy, highbrow lifestyle. He 'acts' a lot in his marriage while he is himself with her.

Unlike MP, characters in WA films who are lesser intellectuals, are the ones who are given progressive arcs when they learn the capacity to ruminate in in philosophy, literature, history & arts. But in MP, the person 'acts' his way to enjoy the affluent lifestyle. But not necessarily takes in to the intellectual leanings as the means to realize the meaning(lessness) of life. He is already aware of this. He doesn't need extra credentials. But there are other WA characters (of that intellectual stature) are persuaded to earn it & they feel good about themselves in this progression. Female characters in general. And they use up Woody in this process.


And the Woody-Mia Farrow story is also exactly about the intellectual match business. It is not a pure/non-judgmental love (is there anything like that?).Woody is in no social position to cheat on his wife! Yet that is what he tries to do. He also thinks his wife is no match for him. He thinks nearly as poorly of her as thinks of Alda- who is shown to be his 'superior' not just in the 'ways of the world' but also in terms of 'poetry reading'!! So - if only he were not that endearing and relatable a character - we can judge him pretty harshly for putting the moves on Mia Farrow. And we see right before our eyes she is going to smash his hopes and headed exactly in the feared direction. In the end Woody's character does climb his high and lonely moral ground.
Isn't that part of the problem?

Again, there's a clearly defined nebbish anxiety that he explores. That would be best served in a different film.

What kind of meta- ness do you derive by contrasting this intellectual match/conflict to the other one (Which is patched up like a serious examination of crime)? Not a lot.

More importantly, like Rosenbaum, I didn't feel it was justified to lack seriousness of a sex victim (in a way, Huston is too, exploited by Landau), where the sole aim was to let Woody contemplate human sexuality is so mysterious, a nice trademark one-liner. But isn't that deep in itself.

Woody's parts serves a tragicomical function. Exposition by Alda made it obvious. Woody being a musician would understand the role of playing different keys & tones to make a more accessible, entertaining film. I get that.


And for the charges of "highbrow posturing" (I don't think I fully understand what you are agreeing with k-g), Allen has always made fun of it from inside, no? In C&M for instance, Woody's character is shown to be one with a disproportionately bloated ego.

There are several places where he does this. VCB for example - the famous v/o in the picnic scene - he talks about the free spirit of Europe :lol: That's a bloody mockery of the feel of the movie! The girls are enjoying a European vacation, we think we are enjoying a European movie. But by mere tongue-in-cheek mention he all he makes us think that perhaps the girls just think they are drinking in Europe, and by extension, so are we! End of the vacation, we have to pack our bags and come home and be our confused, restricted selves.

Yes, his people seem to believe 'a good life is art-appreciation based'. And they are - the funny ones atleast - anxious about having opinions about them. But by simply presenting these clamorous, clumsy individuals Woody seems to be repeatedly saying life is elsewhere (the wordless Opera scene in Manhattan - what excellence)

In Interiors, he has the husband talk about being afraid of his anger after he wrote a caustic review of his friend's book. Is he is he afraid his opinions are more important to him than his relationships or is he afraid, he is overbalancing to ensure that is not the case? Who is to say? Isn't this quite close to the problem of the intellectual who can't date a girl who believes in sun-signs?

Which wasn't done in a sophisticated manner in MP. There's not much of in-joke quotient here as in his other films. This is where I agree with Queenan. His recent films suffer a lot more. The early films had Woody channeling his Jewish nebbish prototype who tries to make up for his lack of physicality with (pseudo-)intellectual posturing.

But there are judgmental attitudes involved which essentially trivializes a less simplistic being. I obviously don't look for that in a WA film, because I know it serves many functions. At times, it's perfectly woven like 'life is elsewhere' perspective that you've mentioned. But not all films get accounted like that.

I watched part I of the documentary. I'd say there's enough truth to a school-dropout name-throwing Kierkegaard & Dostoevsky without 'em serving a more nuanced function.


That's a little uncharitable. ennamO ippo dhaan graduate aana maadhiri.
Agreed on this.

But what he's trying to suggest is that MP tells the story in a much more refined way. More importantly, it manages to highlight the crime & makes one feel for the mistress (Despite her own questionable morality & misdemeanors) & the neighbor. It also manages to make the crime a direct implication & not detached. In these respects, WA evokes the real problems of humanity. He makes less compromises, by his own admission.

[P_R]

But then, you start feeling more for his story than Angelica Huston. There's something fundamentally wrong if you get distracted like this. Particularly so that the film is about crime.

Exactly. To make these parallels feel equal is itself so 'wrong'. And I think that is very intentionally done by Woody. As Kaufman would say: I'm solipsistic, I'm pathetic.
Of course the sister's abuse experience is largely a joke. But part of the joke is that Woody is only superficially interested in that. He is concerned only about his own 'petty' issues. "My crimes are misdemeanors, the misdemeanors that happen to me are crimes' vice versa for others" is how I made sense of the whole film.

Which is why I was pretty disappointed with Woody making short work of his track in the film.



Landau's seems harmonious & manageable.
..
He could have exposed it & stood a good chance of holding on to the family.

Grown kids, presenting exercise cycle and all. Respectable people he has over for dinner, the decor of the house (pertinent 'ngrEn). It is unimaginable for him to have the world know he was bonking an airhostess. Adulterous affair with a wife's friend or friend's wife is something else. Revealing would have been a breach too gross.

But you are right, I understand, objectively speaking that it wasn't suggested too clearly. I am just a reading a lot because I like this film and Jonah's situation too much.



There's always a part in him that inherently desires to be amoral. Maybe it's in the DNA. The brother is a goon. :lol: equa, engirundhaalum mEdaikku varavum.



There's a lot more sexual tension suggested here. Scarlett Johansson vs Emily Mortimer - Is this even a contest? Well..never mind.
The affair in C&M is about power, than about youthful passions. Here it's not the asexuality of the wife, but the seeming expectation of a certain 'acting your age' asexuality expected of him. oor periya manushan -naalE asexual creature dhaanE.


And the real devils of inherent immorality when they have sex by the fields. Didn't get this one.

This 'throw caution to the winds' moment didn't work for me. Perpetually cautious Rhys-Myers swept off his feet - is what it is supposed to be. A union where finally the palpable tension built that far was finally relieved. I could see what Woody was trying to do, but it didn't work that way for me. May have a lot to do with my scant estimation of Ms.Johansson's attractiveness.


He 'acts' a lot in his marriage while he is himself with her. Yes. His lies and simple-duplicity are the reasons why this affair-situations compares less favourably to the C&M.
In MP I didn't find myself rooting for Rhys-Myers. Even though I am quite supportive of shooting Ms.Johansson.


MP, the person 'acts' his way to enjoy the affluent lifestyle. But not necessarily takes in to the intellectual leanings as the means to realize the meaning(lessness) of life. He is already aware of this. He doesn't need extra credentials. And that was a very good touch methought.
And he is not talking survival. He willing to play-act for the lifestyle. What would you rather do, when you don't know what you would want instead?


But there are other WA characters (of that intellectual stature) are persuaded to earn it & they feel good about themselves in this progression. Female characters in general. And they use up Woody in this process.
Yeah. The night-school cultural improvement stuff. But far from it being something to criticize Woody about, he has always shown the emptiness of that, right? He says that quite directly, no:
Alvy Singer being happy about Annie taking her boyfriend to 'Sorrow and the Pity'.

Or is portraying that as the intellectual equivalent of a makeover itself objectionable?




if only he were not that endearing and relatable a characterIsn't that part of the problem? Again, there's a clearly defined nebbish anxiety that he explores. That would be best served in a different film. Hmm I am not so sure. As I said above, his problems being nothing in comparisons to the murder IS the point.



(Despite her own questionable morality & misdemeanors) Actually Nola is a poor thing. There is not much to question her morality about, right? Her boyfriend's mother gives her a pretty hard time, she is flopping auditions, she is the other misfit in the #posh family but Woody makes you sympathize with her predicament. Particularly when contrasting with the pretending rat Rhys-Myers is.


It also manages to make the crime a direct implication & not detached. Consequently it makes it impossible for anyone to sympathize with Myers. The film doesn't aim to either I guess. But when the doctor feels the heaviness of having snuffed out a life in C&M, you really feel it. The revisiting the crime scene moment, he is simultaneously disturbed by what he has done (still corpse of someone who so recently was a threat) simultaneously removing the evidence. That split when you indulge yourself in self-pity, remorse and without batting an eyelid indulge in self-preservation - I found that highly impressive.



In these respects, WA evokes the real problems of humanity. I actually think C&M is more human in this respect. There is an element of self-deception (finally you deceive/convince yourself well enough, you are home and dry) is very well handled here.


He makes less compromises, by his own admission. vayasaana kaalathula summA illaama pEtti kudukkuraar. inimE ennai kEttuttu dhaan pEsanumnu sollap pOrEn.

[kid-glove]

In C&M, the deception is possible because it's handled in a compromised manner. That we feel more for Landau is problematic. What if he was directly involved in the murder & then earns the sympathy? Not having to let his brother's hitman to get the job done? What if he didn't have a loving family & had to leave it all for aging air-hostess, who uses his financial misappropriation for blackmail purposes? That would be a real challenge.

The film makes a case that the moral compass is in itself self-deception. Landau coming out of that guilt sort of shunts the extended feeling at crime scene.


To make these parallels feel equal is itself so 'wrong'. And I think that is very intentionally done by Woody. As Kaufman would say: I'm solipsistic, I'm pathetic.
Of course the sister's abuse experience is largely a joke. But part of the joke is that Woody is only superficially interested in that. He is concerned only about his own 'petty' issues. "My crimes are misdemeanors, the misdemeanors that happen to me are crimes' vice versa for others" is how I made sense of the whole film.


His problems being nothing in comparisons to the murder IS the point.

I'd prefer if the feelings were reserved more for the real victims than the self-absorbed loser. The precedence matters (not unless the film wants to address the problematic attitudes of the audience having to side with the upperclass/middlerclass, both intellectual & social*). Mechanics of C&M so clearly works against that. OTOH, MP is able to tell the story but define proper boundaries that wouldn't problematize. Not have to use the murder to contrast the pettiness of one man, or more directly serve as means to show up the morality that we create for ourselves (& give an expository ending with both adulterous men, one sexual & other intellectual, ruminating.).

Nola having sex with Meyers character did strike as immoral & deplorable to me. It seemed that their physical union was a way to offset & release the hassles of having to 'conform' to the highbrow. It worked on that plane to me.

* - I'd revisit C&M more, wanting to identify & feel for Woody's character, Landau's character. But it's exactly this that makes one guilty as charged. IF Woody wants to show that this is wrong, he failed. MP is less problematic & less self-absorbed. More unsettling, less backpatting & less didactic. It's mechanics as a thriller and the visual choices (off-camera violence, Meyers shooting at the screen) shows masterful sensibilities of WA. The element of luck as events unfold deciding one's implication. And it didn't need a philosopher's v-o over a montage!

[groucho070]

Thilak, thanks for the link. Tried to read the following discussions between you and PR, but got cross-eyed instead. Irumbadikkira idattula... Parava illa, innoru nAl varen.

[groucho070]

By the way, do you know that there comic strips based on him? Here's the creator talking about it, with loads of advice from Woody on writing/creating. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/oct/18/woody-allen-comic-strip) Love this para:

Working with Woody was smooth sailing: he was modest, efficient, dependable, focused, loyal, generous, incisive, serious, and witty. But quietly so. Even when an archetypal Allen quip slips out, there are no eye-rolls, no grandstanding, no bada-boom. He doesn't hang out with comics, he doesn't seek the limelight at awards shows, he doesn't demand his name above the title. He also has incredibly clean hands.

[groucho070]

And if you are not afraid of the authorities. (http://woodyallenmovies.blogspot.com/)

[P_R]

In C&M, the deception is possible because it's handled in a compromised manner. That we feel more for Landau is problematic. What if he was directly involved in the murder & then earns the sympathy? Not having to let his brother's hitman to get the job done? What if he didn't have a loving family & had to leave it all for aging air-hostess, who uses his financial misappropriation for blackmail purposes? That would be a real challenge.

Hmm....as I said. I think it is important that Landau himself does not kill in cold blood and has someone else do it for him.
At one point he talks about turning himself in only for his brother to shake him up saying, he won't let him bring him down along with him (damn these pronouns).
Landau insinuates that the brother threatens to snuff him out too.

He is probably not going to turn himself in. Not because he brother will kill him. But rather because he is unwilling to bring his brother down with him. Or so he would tell himself. If not for such familial appendanges, as a 'pure' individuals is his guilt so big that he would have turned himself in. I don't think so to. But now he can contemplate 'what he would have done, if only...'. An intellectual who has the dirty business taken care of by others, thus he is left with the luxury of pure contemplation. The blood on his hands is figurative.

There IS a duplicity here but it is a very deep one, not excluding self-deception. Remember, he can't bring himself to order a hit. He would rather not actually say it than have his brother infer it.
These are precisely the things I found C&M did so well.


I'd prefer if the feelings were reserved more for the real victims than the self-absorbed loser.
Hmm...I felt the film was all about this contrast.
One man who walks away from murder by merely taking a vacation (on can't but think of Dolores wanted to take a vacation to calm things out between them) while another is having his worst nightmare realized(and we also know his wife is going to leave him, so he is about to get his commeuppance!). The latter is crushed by the very reality that he takes pride in being out of step with, while the former, though equally contemplative of deeper issues, manages to handle things deftly when push comes to shove. His remorse itself was a luxurious stint at moral high ground, lady doth protest too much.


It seemed that their physical union was a way to offset & release the hassles of having to 'conform' to the highbrow. Yes it felt so to me too. But I didn't find it immoral or deplorable, because Brian Cox and his wife are - even though the former is polite and accommodative - not people the audience warms up to. We feel a social camaraderie with Nola and Myers.


And it didn't need a philosopher's v-o over a montage! Even C&M didn't need Levy, did it? It was an interesting snippet. The most interesting thing about the character was his suicide. The man who had it all figured kills himself. It makes us think about murder, whether ending a life is that big a deal etc. That more than any of his points about love.

[kid-glove]

The thing with his brother, who then hires the hitman - shabba. Diffuse mechanism. Landau acts like the brother is the one who is putting ideas into his head (to which the brother snaps back by asking why would he contact him then), etc. He wouldn't turn himself in. Remorse & guilt being easily short changed & gotten over with, seemed to be the closure. The gaze (and we the audience) warms up to Landau's recovery. And I'd blame Woody for this.

It IS problematic to create a contrast that ends up reassuring. The elaborate exposition in the end underlines that. OTOH, MP ends in a bleak, caustic state. Not much of a backpatting.

Levy's suicide read as 'ending a life is that big a deal' and be linked to murder, IS a problem. Not a favorable feature. But again, I'd much rather not have any of the Woody portion in this film.

[P_R]

I caught the latter half of 'Hannah and her Sisters' on tv last night. Yet another example of Woody's sheer mastery in the art of direction - as I understand it.

In one of the last scenes in the film, Elliot (Michael Caine) kisses his wife Hannah(Mia Farrow) in bed.Earlier that evening, Caine was told, in no uncertain terms, by Lee- Hannah's sister- that their brief affair was over.

Till then he was hoping there'd be some relief from his marriage. A relief which we - sitting outside the film- see as potentially ruinous, because - as he himself says - Hannah is perfect. "Too perfect" is the worst charge he seems equal to laying on her - so much so that one is inclined to think he is grasping at straws to redeem what is simply a primal attraction to his sister-in-law. We do not sympathize with his alleged suffocation in the perfection of his nice wife as we are privy to all his machinations throughout.

With the door now shut on him, they have the only marital confrontation which they seem to have ever had (with a door half-open so we see only one party till it is slammed shut on our face). The circumstances that lead to it are extraordinary in themselves. She asks him uncomfortable questions close to a subject where he has just taken a blow, and is being forced reassess his position. Her timing is an example of superb depiction of typical couple-moments.

They come as close as possible to the frank exchange of emotions but Elliot stops short of yielding to the moment and revealing the unnecessary. The perilous sense of individuality which can hurt loved ones badly, was possibly reigned in because his hopes had just been dashed moments ago, thus (presumably) making his survival instinct come to the fore. A day earlier this conversation would have been different and its outcome possibly longlasting.

But even in that argument, during his pre-emptively angry dismissal he (and we) sees that she considers him above and beyond any shred of suspicion. One can infer that itself would make him comfortably relieved on the practical plane, while simultaneously heavily guilty on the emotional/relationship plane (which by way of constructing this sentence I have inadvertently suggested is orthogonal -sheesh - to the practical plane). In fact she is the kind of person who may feel guilty for making him feel so. This humungous trust surplus is likely to make him feel all the more terrible.

That is the night he kisses her - after ages, we infer- quite intensely and professes love.

What do we make of that moment?
Is that a moment where his animal passion is being 'merely' channeled to his wife?
Now that the temptation is cleared away, is he investing all his emotions sincerely back into the marriage?

We like to believe the above two are different. We see a duplicitious, weak, self-serving man and a innocent, kind-hearted wife.

But it is also quite possible he himself doesn't know the difference at that moment. After all, every moment is labelled and defined at a later point in time.

We see weak man who wants to survive, who doesn't want to cause hurt - now that there is little to gain from doing so.

And, as he indicates in a voice-over in the subsequent scene, feeling change and pass.So, it was indeed wise to keep mum about something which, left to itself, will fades into inconsequence. Or so it seems at that time

http://dagalti.blogspot.com/2012/01/of-kiss-what-heck-do-we-know-anyway.html

[Nerd]

Manhattan Murder Mystery - Fantastic (thriller part was a little underwhelming). Tonnes of roll on the floor moments. ROFLMAX was when Woody says 'See I told you!' to Keaton sitting inside the car seeing a 'Dead' lady walk into a hotel. :rotfl3:

"This woman is forever dying"
"That's an alternative lifestyle" to Keaton who reads out a news from the morning paper. The news - A man killed 10 people and ate each one of them.
"Try giving her the present". Woody and Keaton visit an old lady with a gift, and Keaton finds her dead.

And a so many of them. :bow:

[SoftSword]

enna pr ivlo promote panraar...
ivaroda best edhachum irundhaa suggest pannunga... pakkaren...

[Bala (Karthik)]

SS
Start with this scene


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZVGhG59l3M&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[SoftSword]

comedy tv serial madhiri irukku...
oru padam sollunga paakkaren..

[V_S]

sorry to poke my nose here.

SS,
My all time favorites are Annie Hall and Manhattan. Watch these two, you will know who Woody Allen is. I have seen only few of his films, but I once I watch his films, I can never watch other films for atleast a month. OnnumE illaatha maadhiri irukkum, aana nalla patta rewind panni kEkara maadhiri, padam mudinchadum, rewind panna vaikkum, that too immediately (I mean you are rewinding 2hours, not just 5 minutes). I never felt like this. As far as I know he is an encyclopedia.

[SoftSword]

thanks VS.... paathudren..
evlavo vettiya irukkom... imdb ellaam poi padam thedrom... ipdi yarachum soningana evlo vasadhiya irukkum...
makkalae.... plis to start a must watch movies thread... evlavo uttu poirukku...

[Nerd]

makkalae.... plis to start a must watch movies thread... evlavo uttu poirukku...
Adhu maadhiri 2,3 thread indha section-layE oru 5-6 varusmaa irukkE.. Naanellaam adhai padichu therinjikittu dhaan ipdi peter vidradhu :lol2:

Start with simple/straight ones like Manhattan Murder Mystery. See you already got 4 recos within 4 hours.

[V_S]

SS,
When I wanted to watch the best of the best of Hollywood films few years back, I searched and searched and end up with this link.
http://www.filmsite.org/momentsindx.html

This link serves me a reference. I was skeptical initially, but after watching a few from their list, then I started collecting them. Very authentic list atleast for me. Now I have 80% of these films in my collection.:smile: Every one is a must watch. You would see the last best film was made in 1977 (:wink:) according to this list and my very favorite, 'One Flew Over Cuckoos' Nest' (1975).

[venkkiram]

Thanks V_S for the link. Will start collecting/watching the movies!

[SoftSword]

Adhu maadhiri 2,3 thread indha section-layE oru 5-6 varusmaa irukkE.. Naanellaam adhai padichu therinjikittu dhaan ipdi peter vidradhu :lol2:

Start with simple/straight ones like Manhattan Murder Mystery. See you already got 4 recos within 4 hours.

'non indian film u watched'... naanum neraya murai adha thedi paatthu dhaan solven...
adhula sila padam mokkayaa kooda irukkum...

sari neenga anga oru 10 must watch movies list podunga... ellaarum podattum...

[SoftSword]

SS,
When I wanted to watch the best of the best of Hollywood films few years back, I searched and searched and end up with this link.
http://www.filmsite.org/momentsindx.html

This link serves me a reference. I was skeptical initially, but after watching a few from their list, then I started collecting them. Very authentic list atleast for me. Now I have 80% of these films in my collection.:smile: Every one is a must watch. You would see the last best film was made in 1977 (:wink:) according to this list and my very favorite, 'One Flew Over Cuckoos' Nest' (1975).

thanks VS, would bookmark the link...
downloaded annie hall already...

[V_S]

Good SS :smile:

venkki, you are welcome.
Please also find 50 greatest directors of all time, and Woody is right up there. This site is a treasure and it has lot of information, reviews, used to be my favorite pass time during weekends.
http://www.filmsite.org/directors.html

[Bala (Karthik)]

SS
Plot based-a venumna i would recommend you to start with Match Point, Cassandra's Dream, Nerd sonna MMM, Crimes and Misdemeanors
[let me know your preference between MP and CAM]

Deconstructing Harry enakku remba pidikkin. Hilarious and very high repeat value. Annie Hall irukkave irukku.

Idhellam mudichittu matra "relationship" films/comedies ku vaanga


Blade/can't get through - Alice, Everyone Says I Love You, Stardust Memories (pala thadava try panni full-a paakka pidikkala)

[groucho070]

SS, I say start from beginning. When he was making pure comedy/spoofs, and slowly transforming into serious filmaker (not without those obvious European influence).

[kid-glove]

SS
Start with this scene


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZVGhG59l3M&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I found this scene very grating. Although I sort of get what he has to say about shrinks.

But it got me thinking. Around this time, he had to go through domestic-turmoil indicted slander, every tabloid press made him out to be a vile, disgusting person. That Woody pulled his hand out of his ___ & stretched himself..

a) R*ted expletives

b) Black people in prominent roles (but then casting the black woman as sexual worker wouldn't get Spike Lee excited.)

[groucho070]

Also, try reading this (http://www.movieline.com/1991/05/01/woody-allen-whine-women-and-song/). Sorry if its a repost, but Queenan became my fav writer also for "my sentiments exactly" reason.

[kid-glove]

I don't really take Queenan seriously in terms of film criticism, but he really earns his dough when he slams an easy target like Woody.

Trivia for Mann enthusiasts. The actress who plays the hooker in DH also appears (very briefly) as mother of the black hooker no.98456779543 in Hollywood(who gets killed by the murderous redneck), in "Heat".

[Bala (Karthik)]

"I found this scene very grating" - Why?

Shrinks: What's with the west and "analysts"? Or is it just Woody? Or just the upper class?

[kid-glove]

"I found this scene very grating" - Why?

Shrinks: What's with the west and "analysts"? Or is it just Woody? Or just the upper class?

So loud & uninteresting altercation, devoid of humor. A bit much of a parlor trick (keeping the patient waiting), that even the worst sitcoms on TV resort to. Adding a laughter track(although I really hate) might have enhanced the scene.

Also the sheer irony of casting, the lady is far more attractive on a relative scale to WA, that one contemplates the possibility of him being able to get her patients* to bed. And having WA to treat in utmost condescending way, again. Old jokes, atheism, morality, blah blah being infused into this. You go 'not again'. You don't usually go 'not again' because he infuses them in far more arresting sentence/conversations than in the scene here. Maybe it's also the sheer loudness of the scene that took away the effect.

Just the upper class. But then again even dentists appear like Shrinks in WA's films.

* - now supposing for the fact that the patient is a bipolar or manic depressed (information of specific kind), old or young, attractive or not attractive,, that'd make for a better effect. It'd be much more effective if that information were provided to us. But for a film like DH, with a fabric that's constantly between the lines of reality-fiction-dream, we'd have to fill, I suppose. So it does work for narrative purpose, but the scene itself was grating & the jokes weren't evocative. Maybe it's WA being provocative, it really felt like it was made my a man who pulled his finger out of his arse & stuck the fat middle one right back at the world. Letting others into the whole ' deconstruction' of Woody, uh sorry, harry.

[Nerd]

The only time Woody was present at the oscars. Hilarious.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpwF6fbLFw4

[V_S]

Thanks Nerd for the video. Yes, hilarious. :D Only through Woody Allen, I started loving New York. Great city and great people!

[venkkiram]

Thanks Nerd for the video. Yes, hilarious. :D Only through Woody Allen, I started loving New York. Great city and great people! Robert De Niro, Scorsese, Al Pacino, Denzel Washington ...the list grows!

[V_S]

Absolutely! Always, any film set in NY city interests me a lot, just because the first film I enjoyed thoroughly watching after I landed in CT, was Annie Hall. That was through my roomie who was elder to me and had a lot of passion towards 70's NY films like Annie Hall, Manhattan, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and so on. Through Woody and other torch bearers, I started to know about NY. Every week he used to introduce me films like this (from library) and every 15 days, I never missed going to NY (through that memorable train ride). It continued atleast for six months till my family arrived. The affection towards NY and its people is beyond any comparison. The road side shops and restaurants, watching manhattan from other side of the river, just felt I was at home in Mumbai. All because of these great visionaries!

[SoftSword]

crimes and misdemeanors

ennayya.... aesthetic'nu chonninga... atheistic'a poyidichu....
pongayya... ungala ellaam nambi oru padam kooda paakka mudiyaadhu...

[P_R]

Blade/can't get through - Alice, Everyone Says I Love You, Stardust Memories (pala thadava try panni full-a paakka pidikkala)
Alice - I watch it every time it is on MGM.
The scene where he undresses her when she is talking about her kids' reaction to mother Teresa, the chinese doctor, the ending with the v-o gossips and the easy dips into surrealism - invisibility, Alec Baldwin, confessional in front of her house, the sister (when I saw so you wardrobe, that was too much for me - said with so much earnestness that you totally totally see her point. vERa eppadi solla mudiyin?!). Exland.

I admit ESILY has some slow parts - but overall it is quite impressive. The very relationship of Woody's character to Mia Farrow and Alan Alda - the situation itself is funny. And many like that. The dance, musical, Parisian ending - lightA emotionalAvE irukkum.

Stardust Memories - :shock: enna viLayAdreenga. One of his best.


I found this scene very grating. Grating-A. Great-nu vENaa sollalaam.


What mankind does not need is Mariel Hemingway leaving a message on Woody's answering machine telling him that Grand Illusion is being shown on TV that evening.
....
What mankind does not need are lines like: "I accept your condemnation," and "Did you read my novel?"
idhukku mEla indha aaLai padikkiRadhE waste.
He does not get Woody. He does not get the turmoils of an approbation seeking, solipsistic, superiority-complex infused, insecure man with epicurean ambitions- even if only for differentiation and muddled without directions, unweighed by scruples.

Have I spoken too much :roll:

B(K), have you seen the analyst in 'Anything Else'. He's just impossibly funny.

[P_R]

Groucho, have you seen 'Don't Drink the Water' ?
It is like his early films, like a film version of the kind of prose he writes in the NewYorker.
Absurdity, slapstick, one-liners - you name it.

Woody and family are stuck in the US embassy in a communist country, where they seek refuge after they are suspected to be spies by the local police.
Woody is a Newark caterer who hates the European cuisine of the chef and Arab emir entourage who is camping at the embassy. There is a priest who has been in asylum in the embassy for 6 years (who loves to show magic tricks but completely sucks). Embassy headed by a bungling Michael J Fox.

The ending is just outrageous.

Woody is given a gun and his personality changes. He gets all serious, full of self-confidence and practices some trigger-happy moves. :rotfl:
The under secretary is hit on the head by a brick and starts thinking his both the Wright brothers. Don't even ask :lol:

He picks up a bomb

[P_R]

softie, crimes paththi unga karuththukaLai sollavum.

[P_R]

I found this scene very grating. Although I sort of get what he has to say about shrinks.

But it got me thinking. Around this time, he had to go through domestic-turmoil indicted slander, every tabloid press made him out to be a vile, disgusting person. That Woody pulled his hand out of his ___ & stretched himself..

a) R*ted expletives

b) Black people in prominent roles (but then casting the black woman as sexual worker wouldn't get Spike Lee excited.)

Watched the scene again now.
ennavO pOnga.

A psychoanalyst saying: this is bullshit, "no you can't explain", "don't you try to play, blame the victim",

"Okay, if you're telling me you're settling I accept that" :rotfl2:

I mean he is totally logical - I am merely explaining to you why my choice of necessity is confined to your practice :lol:
The frustration of not being able to hurt him, make him repent - simply because he is on a different plane - who can make up such kind of stuff I say!

The very idea of an analyst - how can anyone advise anyone. What does anyone know?
The very idea of an artist - how can anyone writer about life and people . What does anyone know?
How is anyone qualified to advise? How is anyone qualified to create art?

What is it about art and relationships? That you bare your deepest to someone.
Remember Manhattan - his problems with Streep's book is she is going to reveal the quirks of their relationship.
Speaking about one's deepest problems to a stranger is what psychoanalysis is.

Here he sleeps with her patient. In ESILY his daughter listens and feeds him information about Julia Roberts. It's all the same Mr.Sivam.

Woody :clap:

[P_R]

I mean the gay abandon with which he throws in an editing blooper in the middle of that scene
ennangadA film, medium, making - I thumb my nose at you 'nRa maadhiri :lol:

[P_R]

The opening scene. The brilliant brilliant Judy Davis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eOr08Cefpc4


Outrageously funny and at the same time very ....pertinent 'ngraar saar.

Everyone' misery - you even caused the misery - mix your f'ing alchemy and turn it into gold

Artist 'Oda predicament exaggerated for effect.

I mean he walks away from her when she threatens suicide saying, "it's not in you. Jane is the dramatic one. The solo violinist".
Oru artistic typification, reduction influencing how one views human-beings. :bow:

[P_R]

So whose life are you exploiting today?
You'll be very happy to (know).. <cut away by an editing jump> :lol:

en idhayaththil...

[kid-glove]

Watched the scene again now.
ennavO pOnga.

A psychoanalyst saying: this is bullshit, "no you can't explain", "don't you try to play, blame the victim",

"Okay, if you're telling me you're settling I accept that" :rotfl2:

I mean he is totally logical - I am merely explaining to you why my choice of necessity is confined to your practice :lol:
The frustration of not being able to hurt him, make him repent - simply because he is on a different plane - who can make up such kind of stuff I say!

The very idea of an analyst - how can anyone advise anyone. What does anyone know?
The very idea of an artist - how can anyone writer about life and people . What does anyone know?
How is anyone qualified to advise? How is anyone qualified to create art?

What is it about art and relationships? That you bare your deepest to someone.
Remember Manhattan - his problems with Streep's book is she is going to reveal the quirks of their relationship.
Speaking about one's deepest problems to a stranger is what psychoanalysis is.

Here he sleeps with her patient. In ESILY his daughter listens and feeds him information about Julia Roberts. It's all the same Mr.Sivam.

Woody :clap:

Of course, I got the very idea of an analyst saying that stuff is meta- as I said in that post. But it didn't come off as funny (even when you put :rotfl2: emoticons next to it), and it IS condescending to write characters like that analyst. I don't mind the condescension if it's meta- or funny. It didn't come off as funny, but it's meta-. I thought I was clear in that post. The casting, acting, dialogue delivery, the volume levels, the shot making, editing, etc didn't really sit well. And the sitcom parlor trick. OF course the whole film is littered with condescension of casting, continuity, editing, filmmaking & shot locations, I refuse to believe it's all too intelligent or meta- but it came off well.

[kid-glove]

The opening scene. The brilliant brilliant Judy Davis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eOr08Cefpc4


This kind of expletive-heavy scene must only be a consequence of divorce.

This scene works precisely because of Judy Davis. Woody is rather weak, but his screen history sort of registers him funny. That we forgive his usual ticks like 'what are you telling me', 'oh give me a break'.

[kid-glove]

Groucho, have you seen 'Don't Drink the Water' ?
It is like his early films, like a film version of the kind of prose he writes in the NewYorker.
Absurdity, slapstick, one-liners - you name it.

Woody and family are stuck in the US embassy in a communist country, where they seek refuge after they are suspected to be spies by the local police.
Woody is a Newark caterer who hates the European cuisine of the chef and Arab emir entourage who is camping at the embassy. There is a priest who has been in asylum in the embassy for 6 years (who loves to show magic tricks but completely sucks). Embassy headed by a bungling Michael J Fox.

The ending is just outrageous.

Woody is given a gun and his personality changes. He gets all serious, full of self-confidence and practices some trigger-happy moves. :rotfl:
The under secretary is hit on the head by a brick and starts thinking his both the Wright brothers. Don't even ask :lol:

He picks up a bomb

That's one of the few redeeming moments. But generally not one of his best, it's a nice little TV movie to collect his paycheck.

I don't think it's decided that his 'early funny ones' outscore his 'serious' work. But I sort of get Groucho's general problem with Woody's later work.

[P_R]

But it didn't come off as funny (even when you put :rotfl2: emoticons next to it),
Oho :-|
I find it funny every time.

it IS condescending to write characters like that analyst. I don't mind the condescension if it's meta- or funny. It didn't come off as funny, but it's meta-. I thought I was clear in that post. Clear only. But I was emphasizing it again as it was one of the reasons I found the humour working even on repeat viewing.
btw you mean condescending to analysts, right?


The casting, acting, dialogue delivery, the volume levels, the shot making, editing, etc didn't really sit well.
Hmm... all if it worked for me. Particularly the shot making.


it's a nice little TV movie to collect his paycheck. Agree. A fun, one time watch. I found myself in splits.
It took some time to take off. But I don't think it is a movie which needed redeeming moments.

"That's a stove? I've been mailing letters in it all week"
Woody attacking the chef
The milk pouring through the sleeve of the priest
The priest walking into the room unable to get out of the staitjacket at the exact moment when Woody is giving a piece of his mind to the emir
The emir being pushed down the stairs - its as predictable a slapstick moment as it gets with absolutely nothing more to it, but is still funny
Woody and his wife (the girl who comes in Radio days) goofing up the names - the least of the things they could have handled, in their 'assumed personality'
"..and I am his lovely wife" :lol:

Gagfest.

[P_R]

Celebrity script not available online? Not there on Script-o-rama.
It is a lazy film but I quite liked it. Was looking for the midnight lines that Ken Branagh tells Winona Ryder. I remember finding them quite romantic. Can't find the lines.

[groucho070]

Yikes, I didn't see your query, P_R. Of course, I love it. As you guys indicate, it was indeed his earlier work (was a feature movie first but without Woody). "Recent" stuff like this, Deconstructing Harry and even Small Time Crook makes me miss his earlier work.

I've watched Celebrity on big screen. It was screened in a special theatre in Singapore that screens "Restricted (Artistic)" movies, meaning they allow TA stuff there. It was there I realise how awesome Leo is when he is playing himself. He has, ever since. Branagh is probably the best Woody imitator if you called that imitating rather than acting. Good stuff, but one time vonly.

[P_R]

He goes to a school reunion. Finds himself looking the youngest. Everyone looks like they have their accomplishments behind them. He feels he has still not found his feet - time running out on such things. Even feels he probably looks older to his classmates. Does not have youth on his side as much as he thinks. Comes back to promptly end things with his wife. His excesses and indiscretions we come to know of, don't bother us (me). His predicament (?) is engaging.

And then the woman who cared and nurtured him in worst moment - he has to give the bad news to her at a dramatic time. It brings out the side of her he has (we have) never seen. The maternal creature is not to be seen. And there goes the novel (misery turned into gold-dust? Even a reversal of Alvy quoting Balzac: there goes another novel).

The previous night he talks to Winona (the lines I am searching for) he talks about knowing her with the conviction of one who created her. She is the one in his previous books he says. The romantic imagination of having anticipated her, the illusion of having created her (the thrill of perfect understanding that the counterpart can thus anticipate) are brought out well.

Couldn't help thinking of two quotes. One the waeldfamous one by Clementine in ESoTSM

Clementine: too many guys think I am a concept or I complete them...

And Inception....

Mal: I'm the only thing you do believe in anymore.
Cobb: I wish. I wish more than anything. But I can't imagine you with all your complexity, all your perfection, all your imperfection. Look at you. You are just a shade of my real wife. You're the best I can do; but I'm sorry, you are just not good enough.

Also Winona Ryder mEla andha kaalathulayE oru idhu :mrgreen:
So when she reacts the way she does in that scene, lightA emotion aayittEn.

Apparently she should have done Melinda and Melinda - which again is another lovely film despite Well Ferrel, incorrigibly lazy ending.

Same film, problems of course - pazham dhaaNdi periya vishayam.

[groucho070]

Stumbled on this. Woody already propecising that folks won't take him seriously.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi_95tncBbo&feature=related

[kid-glove]

Before PR's post on S & L, might I add that Samantha Morton's performance is one of the greatest perfs last century, and more of an achievement than any of L'Artiste. Penn is brilliant too.

[groucho070]

Based on Harpo Marx, right?

[kid-glove]

Yight.

[P_R]

Sweet and Lowdown
Woody makes me likes the films that I am wired to hate.

Music - who me?
Superficial characterization
Half baked character developments
Following the life and quirks of a character who half-delivers on the 'interesting-ness' promise
'I get it, will you move on' level repetition of quirks, lines
A few throwaway good moments do not a movie make
Sudden gag-scenes, enjoyable standalone, but whose feel has nothing to do with that of the rest of the movie

If any other filmmaker who dared put up such an offering - I'd've roundly questioned his right to be continue in the business.
I'd alternate between annoyance of wasting time on a film I didn't "get" and the self-pity of not being able to 'get' them.

But I liked this one.

And it's not like anything has changed. I am likely to react the same way when I see such a movie by someone else.
But this one, I liked.

[kid-glove]

Isn't the film about the very difficulty of 'characterizing' the artist? Especially an Artist who is a lousy prick, & as emotional reclusive as Emmet. "Emmet is an artist and because he's an artist he needs no one", isn't the film about that 'lack of connection'? Samantha's character functions as that 'connection', standing in for the audience, who have one-way connection with the Emmet, deriving pleasure from his work but the latter refutes to seek approval or meaningful exchange. Especially an Artist who is as gifted as Emmet, second only to Django..

I like both his pseudo-documentary work, Zelig & this..

[P_R]

Yes it is as all that.
I am saying, with any other director I'd've been like: "big deal. Make it engaging. Don't assume I'm interested etc."

So half the time I was conscious about feeling: "oh so this how people feel about those movies which I wonder how people can like" :lol:

[kid-glove]

I hate you for that, but you know that already.

[P_R]

Another Woman
Good. Lazy fellow. Konjam tight-A ezhudhi irukkalaam.
paraalla.

[Nerd]

Husbands and Wives - How does he do it every single time? I mean writing such awesome characters and more importantly such superb lines. Loved the film.

Was kind of impatient towards the end. And the handheld camera was so jarring. May be he wanted us to be in the middle of things. Sooperappu :clap:

[P_R]

Husbands and Wives - How does he do it every single time? I mean writing such awesome characters and more importantly such superb lines. Loved the film.

:clap: Exactly.

B(K) - 'same film'nu complain paNNuveengaLE, see my maaple talends. eppadi rasikkiRaar paarunga.

[kid-glove]

Return of Judy Davis-Woody together :


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIbYqxqtP38

[kid-glove]

P.Cruz as a prostitute, great casting.

[P_R]

Long wait. When release ?

[P_R]

Lazy bum writing is obvious already. Only one who seems capable of telling such stories, creating cud-cheworthy moments nRadha can hardly wait

[Nerd]

Play it again, Sam!

This has to be the funniest Allen film (he did not direct it though). Slapstick-layum piNNraanyaa. Wickedly/Insanely/Incredibly funny film. Has lots of typical woody moments too but not as heavy in substance as his other acclaimed films. A film not to be missed. Was laughing like a maniac in many scenes.

Saw To Rome with Love trailer when I watched that pathetic Marigold film. June 22 it seems, my first Allen film on big screen :redjump:

[P_R]

:clap:
The 'wrong' signals from the nympho ellAm :rotfl:

And of course, this ATG moment

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o

[P_R]

Saw To Rome with Love trailer when I watched that pathetic Marigold film. June 22 it seems, my first Allen film on big screen :redjump:

Marigold??

[P_R]

Trying to impress in the first meeting

Girl: A bourbon man
Woody: I gotta cut down on my drinking...I put away a quart a day

:rotfl:

oru Onaayaa irundhu paarthaa dhaan...

[P_R]

I think I posted this clip here earlier http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=uNLd_HpyeBw
Coat-ai closet-kuLLa pOttutttu oru cool leaning and look :lol:

I love the rain, it washes memories of the sidewalk of life :rotfl3:

[groucho070]

One of them films that he didn't direct. I still haven't watched another one he didn't direct, The Front. Have you, guys?

[Nerd]

Lots of funny lines to quote:

Dick: Allen the world is full of eligible women
Allen: Yeah, but no one like Nancy. I used to lay in bed and watch her sleep. Once in a while she would wake up and catch me doing that. She would let out a scream :rotfl:

Linda: What are you doing with a Champagne
Allen: I used it to cook, to impress a girl. Made Beef Strangone on a pressure cooker
Linda: How did it taste?
Allen: I don't know, its still on the wall :rotfl3:

"You both should marry and move into a hospital / Can I get a coke with nothing on it please"

Trying to seduce Keaton scene. You have the most EYES / She bought that etc. :lol:

One of my favorite moments was towards the end. Anxiety attack. Tries to play with a dog which does not like it, barks at him. Then goes on to pat a couple of people on their shoulder, one of them falls off a bridge :rotfl: :rotfl3:

-----------------
Grouch: The Front paarththadhillai
P_R: Marigold - The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1412386)

[kid-glove]

I have, Grotch, there's no frontal nudity and it's eminently watchable..

[Nerd]

Bad reviews :oops:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/to_rome_with_love/

[kid-glove]

Par for the course.

[P_R]

MGM channel :clap:

Tune in 9 PM everyday

Fri - Love and Death
Sat- Annie Hall
Sun- Interiors
Today - A MidSummer Night Sex Comedy
Tomorrow - Hannah and Her Sisters
Wed- September
Thu- Radio Days
Fri - Another Woman
Sat -Crimes and Misdemeanours
Sun - Alice

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[rangan_08]

Had a chance to watch " Midnight in Paris ". Not very interesting, I should say. Time machine kind of beaten to death story...poor casting.

I was literally longing to see Woody himself as the protagonist. Very simple & short. Adrian Brody as Dali warrants mention.

I simply take it to be Woody's way of paying homage to Hemingway, Stein, Picasso & Dali... that's it.

[Nerd]

Woody Allen a Documentary (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2397619). Thanks to Netflix. Super long at almost 3.5 hours. But I just loved it. Does not go beyond the surface but as someone who is mostly unfamiliar about his life / works it was a superb watch. Lots of interesting interviews from co-stars / directors like Marty / clippings from old interviews / scenes from almost all his films and the man himself talking about his films. Recommended.

Never knew MiP is his biggest money spinner ever :shock:

Btw started watching Sleeper, first 10 minutes is what I could manage :?

[Nerd]

rombO naaL kazhichu, To Rome with Love is releasing in my town. 3 bucks a piece ticket. This weekend :smokesmile:

[P_R]

3 bucks a piece ticket. :shock:
enna oorunga idhu?
sathyandhEttarlayE adhai vida adhigam aayirumE.

[kid-glove]

Do post your thoughts (in brief) here.

[Nerd]

:shock:
enna oorunga idhu?
sathyandhEttarlayE adhai vida adhigam aayirumE.
Theater remmbba sirisu.. Studio 5-layE (theater name correct-aa theriyalai, watched Dev D there) paadhi dhaan irukkum. 12-15 rows X 12-15 seats.

But its the only theater which plays off-beat films and foreign films. Niche audience-nu solluvaaingaLE :-) :-) Anyay its around 6.50 for matinees and 9 bucks for evening / night shows in other good cinemas..

[P_R]

Do post your thoughts (in brief) here.
:lol2:
Just for jatti

[kid-glove]

When you post in red, I expect to see -edited- , -deleted-, -warning- and -banned-

So don't scare me :lol2:

[SoftSword]

thats PRs split personality posting... but not as bold as yours..

[kid-glove]

http://p.twimg.com/AzyzILZCEAEpYPm.jpg

You are harbouring some misconception regarding all this. He's a misanthrope. I'm just socially awkward. He's the right to my left, and yet he wants to be in red. I don't like/want him here anymore than you do.

Maybe hub should have read 'janangal thevai jadangal aLla' in terms and agreement to free us all, from that guy.

[kid-glove]

Parallel universe, string theory...

I'd not bore you, K_G. But how did you paste the screenshot of the very film that I intuitively bring up in another thread. I swear I am entirely unaware of this!

But now I see you're doing your homework on C-G.

And it's not entirely unexpected to see you paste it from a faux-commie film. A commie film that seems to make peace and have a resolution, with the system well aligned, Lemmon's problematic statement in the Airport of living in a 'fair country'. So in turn, you are endorsing the very conceited hypocritical moves that you (& Zizek) desist! The whole 'investigative'/'procedural' genre is trapped, and always fighting hard to be bereft of this. You should know this.

[Nerd]

Saw To Rome with Love. Nice turnout actually. The average age of the audience was 65+, save for us there weren't even one single person without white hair. In fact we saw so many people in their 80s struggling to even walk :lol:

Anyway remmbba sumaar. 4 stories. Benigni's story was lame. yEng italian couple on their honeymoon, save for some one-liners by cruz very boring. Allen's story started with a bang but the wackiness worked against it. The shower songs were laborious beyond a point. The jokes in the later part were juvenile too. The American trio story is the best of all. Ellen Page, very nice. Disappointed.

[kid-glove]

Parallel universe, string theory...

I'd not bore you, K_G. But how did you paste the screenshot of the very film that I intuitively bring up in another thread. I swear I am entirely unaware of this!

But now I see you're doing your homework on C-G.

And it's not entirely unexpected to see you paste it from a faux-commie film. A commie film that seems to make peace and have a resolution, with the system well aligned, Lemmon's problematic statement in the Airport of living in a 'fair country'. So in turn, you are endorsing the very conceited hypocritical moves that you (& Zizek) desist! The whole 'investigative'/'procedural' genre is trapped, and always fighting hard to be bereft of this. You should know this.

It's important though to put this into context. Lemmon's character is actually a father of Christian Science in the film. There's a complex mapping being made, dialectically, from dual perspective of Sissy Spacek, and Lemmon. I am 'right', even when I am left.

[rangan_08]

:lol2:
Just for jatti

http://www.mayyam.com/talk/images/icons/icon7.png

hope there's no vested interest.

[rangan_08]

Most of the Chennaiites would have read this. For those who haven't

http://www.thehindu.com/arts/magazine/article3665604.ece

[kid-glove]

It's important though to put this into context. Lemmon's character is actually a father of Christian Science in the film. There's a complex mapping being made, dialectically, from dual perspective of Sissy Spacek, and Lemmon. I am 'right', even when I am left.

To be read as, I am straight, even when I am gay

[kid-glove]

-deleted-

[kid-glove]

Hope you'd slept well after that..

[P_R]

Long live the imbecili :clap:

[Sid_316]

Long live the imbecili :clap:

:thumbsup:

Nalla than irunduchu..Same same but still enjoyable. Maybe better than whatever works. Didn't sleep off like i did in his last venture :-P

[P_R]

I was expecting it to be only 'You will meet a dall dark stranger' range.
And I knew it will surely better than the disaster that was his last acting outing - Scoop.
Turned out to be even better than Whatever Works. In fact I'd say this was nearly as good as 'Anything Else' (which has become a kinda favourite of mine).

Ricci:Page::Allen:Baldwin

To that add a dash of 'Celebrity' and Allen-fiction style absurdity.

The timeline of the parallel stories is totally totally screwed-up and Allen doesn't care :lol:

[kid-glove]

Should it survive till the coming weekend, I might watch..

[Nerd]

OhO, idhai vidavum mokkai padamellaam eduthirukkaaRaa indhaaL?!

And this better than midnightimbaris? Yougottabekidding :twisted:

Saw Broadway Danny Rose - not bad, but not good either. Certainly better than rome at least.

[kid-glove]

BDR'lam arpudham-nga..

[Nerd]

Rangar review pOttirukkaar:
http://baradwajrangan.wordpress.com/2012/09/08/to-rome-with-love-3465578/

[P_R]

OhO, idhai vidavum mokkai padamellaam eduthirukkaaRaa indhaaL?!
Err...mokkai padam eduththirukkaar.
idhai 'mokkai' enRu suggest seivadhai kaNdikkiREn.


And this better than midnightimbaris? Yougottabekidding :twisted:
Yaar sonnadhu?
As of now I am reserving judgement. MiP was lovely in its own way. Comfare paNNa vENdaamnu dhaan mention paNNavE illai

I may watch it again this weekend.

Formaldehyde ellAm ippo ninaichAlum chippu peerikittu varudhu

[kid-glove]

Can we also agree Bdr is WA's best performance

[P_R]

Haven't watched it. He's a limited actor. ennaththa best, ennaththa performance.

[P_R]

Someone in brangan's space was complaining about the repetitive themes, ideas, moments. naNbar B(K) kooda appadi solluvaar.
True. But that's not a complaint for me.

Baldwin as the 'wiser' counsel is comparable to Woody's in the severely underrated 'Anything Else'. In fact the Page-Eisenberg track had many parts which felt comparable to the initial phases in the Christina Ricci- Jason Biggs relationship in 'Anything Else'.

The theme of 'famous for being famous' in the Benigni track was elaborated much earlier in Celebrity with the selfsame Judy Davis.Of course, he has changed the tone completely here to suit Benigni (or picked Benigni to suit the role) and the effect is excellent.

The shower-singing is the kind of absurdity that we see in his prose - delightful to see it on screen.

Brangan invokes Stardust Memories - which indeed is a great film. But he had kinda made the same film again even more flippantly and less subtly (although arguably no less poignantly)when he made 'Deconstructing Harry'. For all its segues into his stories, the central theme was still 'an artist going to a function that is honoring him and is constantly assessing his life, which is in disarray'.
(Of course this itself is his take on Bergman's Wild Strawberries'nu @kid-glova maadhiri periyavanga sollakkELvi)

In DH, the focus is on the creativity and how life feeds it (and is therefore bound to be ruined). "Black magician who turns others' misery into gold" as Judy Davis puts in the wonderful opening scene. In SM, the last moment directs attention to the evanescent beauty of a 'moment' in life, which one captures and cherishes on revisit. OTOH in DH, he is accompanied by his characters and concludes (happily and sadly!) that he realizes he 'can't function in real life but only in art'. It is the same but it is resaid because it is another take of it!

And he even kinda broke it down (possibly for the ppl who complain) "All people know the same truth: our lives consist of how we choose to distort it". So he IS making multiple distortions.

Heck, the provincial couple returning from Rome (the audience knowing more about them than they know about each other) is reminiscent of so many movies, even Rebecca Hall's ending in VCB.

And the four tracks in TRWL are on their own trip. Heck, there isn't even a 'meanwhile'. One of the tracks is just one day long! One has got absurb surreal stuff happening - Baldwin is reacted to sometimes and invisible most of the times - he doesn't even bother to explain.

And not surreal being part of central-idea like Purple Rose, but kinda surreal happening in a matter-of-fact manner embedded in a plausible, realistic film like - Alice.(Baldwin in that one too!)

I can understand if people called 'You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger' tired. But this one, naah..

appadiyE..Zurich,Berlin, Copenhagen, Stockholm-nu kalakku thala!

[kid-glove]

Bdr - he's off his base and does really well.

[Nerd]

P_R, Sid hinted that its better than MiP. I read your post but since I have not seen almost all the movies you compared this with (save for VCB) it did not make sense to me.

Really liked Allen's initial scenes which is well, so typical Allen. And Judy made a very good wife. And saw Allen in almost all the characters (Eisenberg in particular) and I only mean this as a compliment. But I had numerous problems with the film:

- The shower singing, wild/wacky etc., but too long and boring.
- Benigni's story, least imaginative of all. I got the point in a couple of scenes, but thirumba thirumba pEsura nee. And his final outburst to reiterate the same thing, bah. Choosing one of the most abused topics all over the world to make a satire was a mistake.
-Page/Heisenberg, nice. Again typical Woody so it worked well. But the ending was dramatic unlike most Allen romances. And Page wasn't as deep as some of Allen's lead ladies.
-Milli/Cruz story, very ordinary. I mean the 'intention' was good (that so many wild things, things they always wanted to do, the larger than life-ness) but was shoddily executed. And the mistaken identity jokes were very sabbaa for me.
-And since he had 4 stories and even subplots within them, he could not go beyond the surface. Spends very little time (well obviously) investing on the characters.

More importantly it did not even work as a comedy. I did LOL at a few places but overall it was a crushing bore.

[Nerd]

On BDR, yes Allen was terrific. I usually don't find faults with his acting at all. He is limited / one-dimensional but does very well. I thought Farrow's character was mediocre. I mean you don't see the usual complexities associated with Allen's female characters. And her turning away from Lou and turning into Allen was kind of contrived. And Allen was the only normal/sane/good person in the entire film which was kind of uninteresting for me. But thinking of it, it was celebration of a 'loser' which was neatly done. Though there were some jokes, the usual Allen wit, the intelligent humour was missing I thought. But yeah, certainly a film which I won't hesitate to revisit.

[Sid_316]

And this better than midnightimbaris? Yougottabekidding :twisted:

.

No tensan :lol: Enaku dhan othu varala.. mel ottama patha nalla irukura madhiri thonudhu but it was very slow and sleep inducing for me :-P. Maybe should give a revisit

[kid-glove]

On BDR, yes Allen was terrific. I usually don't find faults with his acting at all. He is limited / one-dimensional but does very well. I thought Farrow's character was mediocre. I mean you don't see the usual complexities associated with Allen's female characters. And her turning away from Lou and turning into Allen was kind of contrived. And Allen was the only normal/sane/good person in the entire film which was kind of uninteresting for me. But thinking of it, it was celebration of a 'loser' which was neatly done. Though there were some jokes, the usual Allen wit, the intelligent humour was missing I thought. But yeah, certainly a film which I won't hesitate to revisit.

When have we seen him represent the 'under class' in a sympathetic manner, as presented here. And it's one of the roles where he's not throwing around elitists ideals and standard issue ticks.

In fact, it approaches the 'loser' as a victor in ways his other films refuses to do. Where his other films usually celebrate fantasy elitism of the loser, this one actually relishes the inherent goodness of a simplistic individual..

It's full of simple humanly feelings without stacking heavy handed meanings (now I like those kind of Allen films too), a refreshing departure. And expertly directed. His best direction of him as an actor.

[kid-glove]

And one of the best muted endings. A platonic, heart-warming, unifying moment, it is this good-hearted 'forgiveness' that makes him a 'living legend'. I don't think she's 'back with him', at all. He's just asking her back in..

[kid-glove]

Re.MiP
Had a discussion with Raaga Suresh in Twitter:

I wonder why some have this issue over picture postcardly Paris.. He's no Spike Lee to bother about N-E arrondissements. This unsatisfactory feeling of Owen Wilson not getting his pocket picked at nights and/or sodomized by tall, dark, African men. Imagine the possibility of seeing such a world in a WA film. 'Match point' comes close, must have been a triumph for WA..

But this is a WA film. Dangers of the present/real are pre-empted by ideal/fantasy. Usually with a special caveat, that it isn't possible, we still straddle on.. More to the point, 'he' still straddles on. His oeuvre very specifically is about this lack of 'ideal' at large..

The romanticism of the 'present' is tied to the past, so how could WA endorse 'this age' at its purest level? It is about WA, like all his films, the propensity to value written word above all, stuck in that fantasy of the high lit, but still tackling the characters & existential issues in the present, personal but by virtues of WA's own self, phantasmagoric.. filtered through his influences, taking choices that eludes confines of the real, subconsciously governed by the past fantasy. Ultimately it closes the loop with the very impossibility of ideal, when the past seems fantasized by its own past.

And within all that, it's the modernists, the ones of the 'image' above all else, who clearly visualize & truly absorb the scenario at an elevated plane.. This isn't underlined but It is with this predicament, WA straddles in real, governed by fantasy, in visual storytelling & not written form. Wilson must embrace his screenwriting, he is living it.

[P_R]

Nerd, most of your accusation was vaasthavam.
It was an unsubtle retelling of what he has done earlier.
Difference was I found it kinda funny throughout.

[kid-glove]

I was watching "Side by Side" on Celluloid vs Digital, a must watch.

Got reminded then... the film composition, lighting and dramatic precision of Woody's great quartert of late-70's films, Manhattan, Annie hall, Interiors & Stardust Memories, all indebted a lot to Gordon Willis.

[geno]

Bloody darn Nixon, Kissinger and CIA shouldn't have bothered, they should have watched the socialists do their own country and be the outside spectator. Chileans are wholly and systematically fucked up any way.. :lol2:

:pink:

[kid-glove]

Not me :poke: